CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Arts & Letters

Chronological Classics

French compilation album series

Manuscripts, fine bindings, an engraving plate and preserved performance ephemera
Arts and lettersInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 13, 2025
Entity authorityQ96142581
Source-derived summary

The Chronological Classics series consists of 965 jazz compact discs compiled by Gilles Pétard in France. Classics Records was a record company and label founded by Pétard in Paris around 1989. The company also reissued recordings by Rhythm & blues artists in a series which ran to 190 CDs.

The label set out to assemble comprehensive collections of jazz recordings by hundreds of artists previously issued on 78 rpm records (according to European copyright laws, recordings enter the public domain after 50 years) and issue them on compact disc. The series was issued with discographical details and colour-coordinated packaging. Classics Records concentrated on reissuing American jazz, since American record companies were not issuing early jazz editions on anything like this scale. Classics Records had several European rivals in the early 1990s such as Masters of Jazz and Jazz Archives.

The series was initially distributed by subscription, with five issues released each month. The series began with number 500 in December 1989 with Ella Fitzgerald 1935–1937. The series consists of the output of the greatest jazz musicians up to the early 1950s, including Louis Armstrong, Count Basie, Duke Ellington, and Benny Goodman, as well as lesser known artists, such as Jabbo Smith, Claude Hopkins, and Tiny Parham.

Editorial summary

“Chronological Classics” enters the record as french compilation album series. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Chronological, Classics and French can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA useful identification and reception guide that helps separate the work itself from editions, performances, ownership and later interpretation. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1989, 1935, 1937—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Chronological, Classics and French.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Chronological Classics” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Chronological, Classics and French provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Object files, edition statements, performance records and contemporary criticism preserve different stages of the work’s history. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 13, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q96142581. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1989, 1935 and 1937.

Critical limits

Titles can refer to several editions, objects or performances, making precise identification essential before interpretation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Separate the work, its editions or performances, and its later reception. Catalogue records, publication histories and object files often preserve different parts of that story.

Best used for
  • Identifying works and editions
  • Tracing reception history
  • Finding collection records
Verify next

The original object or edition, catalogue raisonné, performance record, rights file and holding institution.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Chronological Classics”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Chronological Classics primary sources, Chronological Classics archive and Chronological research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Chronological Classics”?
  2. How did later circulation or interpretation alter the work’s reception?
  3. Where is authorship, date or provenance documented?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Chronological Classics” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.